No, it's called security.
Let's put it this way: there have been FLOSS projects whose maintainers intentionally pushed compromised code to unsuspecting end users. See for example the colors attack.
What leads you to believe that good intentions are enough?
Following this logic, we should all stop using any and all software for which we haven't personally inspected the full source code for, since this could happen to any of them.
A more reasonable take would be to assess your risk tolerance and the possible benefit for each piece of software you install, and then make the best decision for yourself based on that assessment.
For some people, that means not running an extension that provides minor quality of life improvements due to the possibility of it turning malicious further down the road. For other people, it means the opposite.
Not sure why every security-related conversation devolves into one extreme vs. another extreme. Security must be appropriately balanced against risk tolerance, inconvenience, and a number of individual concerns and preferences.
I haven't? My first comment on this entire topic is the one you are replying to... And it can be summed up as "risk tolerance and security decisions is personal".
Yikes.
How am I supposed to know a direct reply to my comment, saying "if _you personally_" is not actually directed at me personally?
If it wasn't directed at me, I'm not sure why you replied to my comment at all.
Are you talking to me in this comment, or just generally? I have trouble telling.